Do You Think The Sabres Top Brass Sees This As A “Tank” Season?

[Thorny]

31 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Why are you starting from the lineup post-draft?  If they start with what they had prior to that & get Eichel healthy, keep Reinhart & Ristolainen, make a legit offer to Ullmark, replace McCabe (because he was heading to Chicago regardless, happy wife, happy life), sign Danault, add another Ullmark level (or better goalie), and ideally get 1 more veteran D-man & that team could very well make the playoffs.

Yes, the prior year's team finished dead last, but they never had a healthy Eichel from day 1, Ullmark missed ~1/2 the season, & Hall quit when Jack was shelved.  So, that team's record was a lot worse than what it should've been on paper.

None of those moves suggested above would've necessitated a "mortgaging of the future." At some point, they have to stop "mortgaging the present."

Divisions getting back to normal should help this team right off the bat, for one, relative to last season. 

[RangerDave]

 

36 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Why are you starting from the lineup post-draft?  If they start with what they had prior to that & get Eichel healthy, keep Reinhart & Ristolainen, make a legit offer to Ullmark, replace McCabe (because he was heading to Chicago regardless, happy wife, happy life), sign Danault, add another Ullmark level (or better goalie), and ideally get 1 more veteran D-man & that team could very well make the playoffs.

Yes, the prior year's team finished dead last, but they never had a healthy Eichel from day 1, Ullmark missed ~1/2 the season, & Hall quit when Jack was shelved.  So, that team's record was a lot worse than what it should've been on paper.

None of those moves suggested above would've necessitated a "mortgaging of the future." At some point, they have to stop "mortgaging the present."

I agree that would be ideal.  I just don't think we are in an ideal moment of time right now.

I will actually be happy to see Eichel go.  He is a very skilled player, but has not been a good teammate, and in my opinion, a lousy captain.  He has not been a good leader and the team has not gone anywhere with him in the lineup.  His bad attitude and outsized opinion of his worth has not helped us win.

I was sorry to see Reinhart go, as I thought he played hard and was skilled.  He is one of my favorite players.  Unfortunately, I do not think he would have signed with this team after this year.  So, trading him for the assets we did, when his value was as high as it was likely to get, made a lot of sense.

I also liked Ristolainen.  He can be a very valuable piece of a winning team.  Unfortunately, the Sabres are not a winning team at the moment.  His toughness on a losing team does not buy us enough to overcome his weaknesses.  On the right team, it probably does.  Trading him was probably good for him and for the Sabres.

If Adams is getting rid of players who don't want to be here and/or players who don't figure to be around when we start winning, I don't see the negative in that.

[Thorny]

1 hour ago, RangerDave said:

 

I agree that would be ideal.  I just don't think we are in an ideal moment of time right now.

I will actually be happy to see Eichel go.  He is a very skilled player, but has not been a good teammate, and in my opinion, a lousy captain.  He has not been a good leader and the team has not gone anywhere with him in the lineup.  His bad attitude and outsized opinion of his worth has not helped us win.

I was sorry to see Reinhart go, as I thought he played hard and was skilled.  He is one of my favorite players.  Unfortunately, I do not think he would have signed with this team after this year.  So, trading him for the assets we did, when his value was as high as it was likely to get, made a lot of sense.

I also liked Ristolainen.  He can be a very valuable piece of a winning team.  Unfortunately, the Sabres are not a winning team at the moment.  His toughness on a losing team does not buy us enough to overcome his weaknesses.  On the right team, it probably does.  Trading him was probably good for him and for the Sabres.

If Adams is getting rid of players who don't want to be here and/or players who don't figure to be around when we start winning, I don't see the negative in that.

If this is correct, and the team not winning while Jack was here is a reflection of him, whereas the team not winning while Reinhart and Ristolainen were here is not a reflection of them as well, that they were merely being held back by Jack and the team - I'd have liked to seen Reinhart and Risto remain here in action once it became clear Jack wouldn't be back. 

Edited October 11, 2021 by Thorny

[Thorny]

42 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Divisions getting back to normal should help this team right off the bat, for one, relative to last season. 

Wanted to expand on the scheduling thing a bit -

Leaving out the Kraken, our first 10 opponents to start the season:

vs Montreal

vs Arizona

vs Boston

vs Vancouver

at New Jersey

vs Tampa Bay

at Anaheim

at LA

at SJ

vs Detroit

 

- combined points % from last season for first 10 non-Kraken opponents: .487

- combined points % from last season for first 10 opponents LAST year: .566

(Washington x4, Philly x2, Rangers x 2, NJ x2)

I think they have a decent shot to get off the ground running, here

 

[Brad_MI]

1 hour ago, Taro T said:

Why are you starting from the lineup post-draft?  If they start with what they had prior to that & get Eichel healthy, keep Reinhart & Ristolainen, make a legit offer to Ullmark, replace McCabe (because he was heading to Chicago regardless, happy wife, happy life), sign Danault, add another Ullmark level (or better goalie), and ideally get 1 more veteran D-man & that team could very well make the playoffs.

Yes, the prior year's team finished dead last, but they never had a healthy Eichel from day 1, Ullmark missed ~1/2 the season, & Hall quit when Jack was shelved.  So, that team's record was a lot worse than what it should've been on paper.

None of those moves suggested above would've necessitated a "mortgaging of the future." At some point, they have to stop "mortgaging the present."

Good points - just used post draft as a starting point because you have to use “sometime” as a starting point. We’ve been bad for a while…so it’s hard to pick a point in time and say “Have we been tanking since (insert post ‘Existence of the Sabres’ speech here), or have we not been tanking?”. I used post-Draft because I think most people point to that moment in time of going from not good to then extremely bad.

Otherwise;

For Eichel - Im assuming that “rebuild” or “no rebuild” doesn’t change his medical status. I don’t think Adams is including this years teams results in his handling of the surgery discussion, similar to a Tim Murray / Trading for injured E Kane scenario.  Could be wrong. 

For Reinhart / McCabe / Ullmark - I’m assuming none of these players would have stayed for a contract amount that would have been good for cap space in the future. I don’t think any of us can know what it would have taken, but, for example, I don’t think I would have advocated for Ullmark at, say, $6-7M a year for 5 years (assuming from reports that we did offer Ullmark $5M and he took Boston’s instead).

For Risto - I think that was a good move. I think he’s a replaceable player that we got good value for. If we’re a contending team, I think Buffalo then goes and gets another Risto-type player in Free Agency. The baseline assumption here I’m making is that a contending team Does NOT have Risto as a 1A/1B defenseman, and so we would not be relying on his replacement on the top pair.

For free agents, yep, maybe we could have signed players like Danault or Wennberg or someone… I still think it takes a high dollar amount to get FA on this specific Buffalo team and I think it’s an ugly contract in 2-3 years. Could be wrong. 

A lineup of below (don’t crucify it, just thinking out loud for “keep the core, add pieces, don’t mortgage future”) I still don’t know makes playoffs. Again, could be wrong.

Skinner - Eichel - Reinhart

Oloffson - Danault - Cozens

Thompson - Mitts - Asplund

Oloffson - Girgs - Okposo

R2

or, slot in another FA / Trade top six winger and slide others down

Dahlin - Joker

McCabe - Risto / Replacement

FA? - Miller / Samuelson / Etc

Ullmark

1B FA goalie

 

Good points though. Fun talking about it, as opposed to just talking about whether they lose 55 or 60 games this year….

[SabresVet]

18 hours ago, RangerDave said:

I really hope they are not tanking.

I know the two sports are different, but I liken what Adams is doing to what McBean did with the Bills.  They sold, traded, or cut the rotten core out of the team, even if they were highly paid high draft picks.  They weren't tanking.  They were just looking to start with decent players who have the right attitude and build up from there.  They did not bring in splashy free agents, just middling free agents who had the right skills and right attitude.  Then, they drafted well - wherever their picks were.

IF that is what Adams is doing, I support him 100%.  IF, on the other hand, he is trying to field a bad team in order to get a better draft pick, he is another in the long list of moronic managers of the recent Buffalo Sabres who think drafting XXX 18-year old kid is better than drafting YYY 18-year old kid and will make them a better team soon.

Except McBeane had one of the oldest rosters in the league in 2017 upon taking over that franchise.  And that happened after trading Watkins, Dareus, Darby, etc.    

The McBeane "tank" still led to a playoff appearance in Year 1, followed by a really bad team in year 2.  That doesn't exactly fit the definition of a tank.

It's also practically impossible to tank a NFL team...even to get the top college QB.  Too many moving pieces in that game. 

If the Sabres continue with what they've got at goalie, it's hard to see them really competing.  Besides, their lowball offer in term to Ullmark kinda sealed the deal at the position.  Who goes with a 40 year old to play more than 25 games per and/or expects Dustin Tokarski to be a reliable backup?  That's straight-up hockey malfeasance. 

[RangerDave]

42 minutes ago, Thorny said:

If this is correct, and the team not winning while Jack was here is a reflection of him, whereas the team not winning while Reinhart and Ristolainen were here is not a reflection of them as well, that they were merely being held back by Jack and the team - I'd have liked to seen Reinhart and Risto remain here in action once it because clear Jack wouldn't be back. 

I would not pin our lack of success squarely on Jack's shoulders.  There is plenty of blame to go around, from players, to coaches, to management, to ownership.  It was a hot mess.  (Hopefully "was" and not "is"!)  But I would want my captain to rise above that and lead his team to do the best they can with the hand they are dealt.  In my opinion, Eichel did not do that.  Eichel, if healthy and on a winning team, would obviously help that team win.  Just don't put him in a leadership role.  It doesn't suit him, at least not at this point in his life.

If I thought we could keep Reinhart here after this season, I would have made him a good offer to stay.  I just don't think that was going to happen.

And, again, if we were a winning team, having a Ristolainen on our team would be a very welcome piece.  I wish we were there and Risto could be that piece for us.

If, if, if.....  it's sad.

[RangerDave]

14 minutes ago, SabresVet said:

Except McBeane had one of the oldest rosters in the league in 2017 upon taking over that franchise.  And that happened after trading Watkins, Dareus, Darby, etc.    

The McBeane "tank" still led to a playoff appearance in Year 1, followed by a really bad team in year 2.  That doesn't exactly fit the definition of a tank.

It's also practically impossible to tank a NFL team...even to get the top college QB.  Too many moving pieces in that game. 

If the Sabres continue with what they've got at goalie, it's hard to see them really competing.  Besides, their lowball offer in term to Ullmark kinda sealed the deal at the position.  Who goes with a 40 year old to play more than 25 games per and/or expects Dustin Tokarski to be a reliable backup?  That's straight-up hockey malfeasance. 

I agree we need better goaltending to compete today.

I don't know what Adams has tried to bring in, either through free agency or via a trade, or if he is pinning his hopes on an Eichel trade.  Unless I can see what his realties have been, I am going to give him the benefit of the doubt.  But, hey!  I'm an optimist! 😀

[Thorny]

 Eakin lining up as a starting lineup C would go a long way towards proving it's a tank

[Sabres Fan in NS]

2 hours ago, nucci said:

but sometimes signing some good vets help with development. We are expecting Mitts and cozens to log big minutes against some top players. They may not be ready for this.

I agree completely and so does KA.  He obviously feels that the vets here are good enough to mentor the youth.  I think he is right that Girgs, KO and Skinner, maybe Miller on D are good enough vets for that purpose.  I agree with KA on this.

[Zamboni]

10 hours ago, Thorny said:

 Eakin lining up as a starting lineup C would go a long way towards proving it's a tank

To some it may …

[PerreaultForever]

11 hours ago, Thorny said:

Divisions getting back to normal should help this team right off the bat, for one, relative to last season. 

How so? 

Lightning, Panthers, Bruins, Laughs, and even Montreal as they were the Stanley Cup finalist (even though they will probably drop off a lot this year). Senators will even be difficult for us. We had Jersey, now we have the Dead Things. Don't see us any better off at all. 

[Archie Lee]

19 hours ago, Thorny said:

 Eakin lining up as a starting lineup C would go a long way towards proving it's a tank

I’m always curious about what causes people to make definitive statements when they have incomplete information. The season has not started yet. Eakin has yet to play a game and if/when he does it isn’t 100% clear he will be the same player he was a year ago. If Eakin plays as poorly as he did last year and continues in the line up then he has a point, but that hasn’t happened yet. 

[Thorny]

9 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

How so? 

Lightning, Panthers, Bruins, Laughs, and even Montreal as they were the Stanley Cup finalist (even though they will probably drop off a lot this year). Senators will even be difficult for us. We had Jersey, now we have the Dead Things. Don't see us any better off at all. 

Because last year we only played the teams in the division. 

The strength of teams outside the division is on average weaker than the strength of teams within it. We get to play more poor teams now. We are definitely much better off schedule wise

Edited October 12, 2021 by Thorny

[Doohickie]

On 10/10/2021 at 9:16 PM, PerreaultForever said:

Ya, I'm with GA, you'll have to explain why you think it's not on purpose. 

Because they're not literally tearing it down to the studs.  They're keeping their prospects that are just reaching fruition and building out from there.  This build is (to cite the tired comparison) more like the Bills current build where they are building the overall team then will add key pieces when they are actually a decent team to finishing the buildout.  Some of those pieces are already in the system (Power, the goalie prospects).  In a year or two when the prospects are ready to play, players like Mitts, Cozens and Thompson will have been groomed to lead the team and upcoming prospects will not be depended on to lead right out of the gate.

On 10/10/2021 at 9:45 PM, LabattBlue said:

There is also this thing good GM’s do…it’s called “making trades”. 

Why fill holes with players when prospects in the system will be on the scene next year or the year after?  Why trade that draft capital away? 

On 10/10/2021 at 9:47 PM, Andrew Amerk said:

Why would a rebuilding team want to trade one of their prospects for a top goalie? Especially when they have 3 in the pipeline?

This is the mistake XGMTM made- he traded the prospects and picks handed to him by Darcy away for vets who didn't gel as a team and didn't work out.

21 hours ago, Taro T said:

Why are you starting from the lineup post-draft?  If they start with what they had prior to that & get Eichel healthy, keep Reinhart & Ristolainen, make a legit offer to Ullmark, replace McCabe (because he was heading to Chicago regardless, happy wife, happy life), sign Danault, add another Ullmark level (or better goalie), and ideally get 1 more veteran D-man & that team could very well make the playoffs.

Yes, the prior year's team finished dead last, but they never had a healthy Eichel from day 1, Ullmark missed ~1/2 the season, & Hall quit when Jack was shelved.  So, that team's record was a lot worse than what it should've been on paper.

None of those moves suggested above would've necessitated a "mortgaging of the future." At some point, they have to stop "mortgaging the present."

Reino was gone regardless.  Building on him this year and expecting him to sign as a UFA is fool's gold.  Same with Risto.  The mistake KA made with Ullmark was not in failing to sign him, it was in failing to recognize that he, too, wanted out and not moving him at the deadline for more picks.  He should have set a deadline for Linus to sign and when he didn't he should have moved him out.  So we would look good this coming year, maybe squeak into the playoffs (but probably not) and then the UFAs would leave and we'd be where we are now a year later and with fewer prospects in the pipeline.

[Doohickie]

6 minutes ago, Archie Lee said:

I’m always curious about what causes people to make definitive statements when they have incomplete information. The season has not started yet. Eakin has yet to play a game and if/when he does it isn’t 100% clear he will be the same player he was a year ago. If Eakin plays as poorly as he did last year and continues in the line up then he has a point, but that hasn’t happened yet. 

Eakin played the game Krueger asked him to play, within the structure established by Krueger.  Granato made it clear that wouldn't fly by sitting him often last year.  Granato set up an uptempo system and I'm sure he's made it clear that last year's effort won't be enough to keep in the lineup (just like it didn't last year).  Eakin's on contract through this year; he is at best a JAG at this stage of his career.  He is a detail in the overall scheme of things and not an indicator.  If there is a younger player that can fill the role better than Eakin does, Eakin will sit.  Based on the preseason it looks like Eakin is putting in an honest effort to play withing Granato's system.

[dudacek]

The way training camping unfolded, it appeared Eakin was on the outside looking in and he worked his way into the NHL (if not starting) lineup.

Not sure if that was actually the case.

The 14 forwards on the roster are exactly the same as what one should have expected them to be after free agency. The same could be said about the defence.

The only person to "make" the team was Dustin Tokarski over Dell.

Peterka, Quinn, Samuelsson, Murray, UPL, Power and Johnson will all get NHL time before the season's over, but will mostly spend their season developing and "earning" their spots.

You can call it whatever you like, but there is little doubt Adams willfully assembled an NHL team of underdogs who need to establish (or re-establish) an NHL identity and gave them an opportunity to do just that.

I don't think he's a much set the team up to lose (although he knows full well it will), he's set them up to create an environment where they can get better.

[bob_sauve28]

20 hours ago, Thorny said:

Wanted to expand on the scheduling thing a bit -

Leaving out the Kraken, our first 10 opponents to start the season:

vs Montreal

vs Arizona

vs Boston

vs Vancouver

at New Jersey

vs Tampa Bay

at Anaheim

at LA

at SJ

vs Detroit

 

- combined points % from last season for first 10 non-Kraken opponents: .487

- combined points % from last season for first 10 opponents LAST year: .566

(Washington x4, Philly x2, Rangers x 2, NJ x2)

I think they have a decent shot to get off the ground running, here

 

Like the way you think! Hopefully we start off with a big W for opening night. Would be so nice to start a season with a win 

[Thorny]

4 minutes ago, bob_sauve28 said:

Like the way you think! Hopefully we start off with a big W for opening night. Would be so nice to start a season with a win 

Def! Hope to see it 

[Thorny]

Everyone to a man said Eakin shouldn’t start. We’ll have to see if he does, but it looks like Adams may literally be beyond any kind of standard or expectation should even the freebie asks that have been graciously levelled by the fan base don’t actually need to be met. 

Finishing last didn’t matter. Assembling an awful roster doesn’t matter. Winning this year doesn’t matter. Ok, well don’t subject us to a healthy dose of checking line Cody Eakin when we are writing a full year off for development. Or, you’re gonna to that too? 

Ok well...just make sure to get those fighting majors on the board I guess. Really, it shouldn’t come to that. Really hoping the practice lines aren’t indicative of Eakin’s role but that seems unlikely at this time 

Edited October 12, 2021 by Thorny

[SabresVet]

3 minutes ago, dudacek said:

You can call it whatever you like, but there is little doubt Adams willfully assembled an NHL team of underdogs who need to establish (or re-establish) an NHL identity and gave them an opportunity to do just that.

I don't think he's a much set the team up to lose (although he knows full well it will), he's set them up to create an environment where they can get better.

Taking payroll down 20% supports the theory (before Jack's traded) that this was never intended to be a winning season.  It's a roster of journeymen, those in their RFA years without options, and players on long term contracts they can't get out from.  

Yet, if the team gets out to a bad start and it devolves into another season near/at the bottom, I fail to see how that helps the youth develop.  They'll be in the same place as their predecessors were a few seasons ago. 

[dudacek]

4 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Everyone to a man said Eakin shouldn’t start. We’ll have to see if he does, but it looks like Adams may literally be beyond any kind of standard or expectation should even the freebie asks that have been graciously levelled by the fan base don’t actually need to be met. 

Finishing last didn’t matter. Assembling an awful roster doesn’t matter. Winning this year doesn’t matter. Ok, well don’t subject us to a healthy dose of checking line Cody Eakin when we are writing a full year off for development. Or, you’re gonna to that too? 

Ok well...just make sure to get those fighting majors on the board I guess. Really, it shouldn’t come to that. Really hoping the practice lines aren’t indicative but that seems unlikely at this time 

Practice lines now almost always reflect opening night.

 

 

[dudacek]

21 minutes ago, SabresVet said:

Taking payroll down 20% supports the theory (before Jack's traded) that this was never intended to be a winning season.  It's a roster of journeymen, those in their RFA years without options, and players on long term contracts they can't get out from.  

Yet, if the team gets out to a bad start and it devolves into another season near/at the bottom, I fail to see how that helps the youth develop.  They'll be in the same place as their predecessors were a few seasons ago. 

The youth are mostly developing elsewhere.

There is one kid who I am worried about this year, and that's Dylan Cozens.

The others are all 3rd and 4th year pros who have seen how the NHL works. They are being put into situations they should be ready for.

Rasmus Dahlin, you think you're a top pairing defenceman? Here's your chance to prove it.

Henri Jokiharju, you think you're top 4? Let's see it.

Casey Mittelstadt, are you really a top 6 centre? Let's see what you've got.

Tage Thompson, R2, Anders Bjork, Rasmus Asplund and  Jacob Bryson are you real NHLers? OK, show us.

It's sink-or-swim, trial-by-fire, put-up-or-shut-up for these guys, and I'm fine with that.

If they can be what we hope they can be, now is the time.

Edited October 12, 2021 by dudacek

[Thorny]

So they’ve adjudged Eakin to be the best man for the job. What does that tell you? Is Adams a poor evaluation of talent? Or do we need to change our minds about what “the job” really is? 

Unrhetorical. I want to hear opinions. 

[bob_sauve28]

11 minutes ago, Thorny said:

So they’ve adjudged Eakin to be the best man for the job. What does that tell you? Is Adams a poor evaluation of talent? Or do we need to change our minds about what “the job” really is? 

Unrhetorical. I want to hear opinions. 

He has played well before. Maybe his camp performance earned him a spot.